I will be chronicling my conversations with those who appear to be unaware of things to come, and quite surprisingly, comfortable with our current system of administration thank you very much!
Behold, the masses (Their identities shall be concealed for their own protection):
Topic: NBC's Golf Tournament Pledge of Allegiance
Behold, the masses (Their identities shall be concealed for their own protection):
Topic: NBC's Golf Tournament Pledge of Allegiance
- Charlie K.If the apology posted actually came from the NBC corporate heads then they are the ones to blame. Network heads can not tell me that the decision was made from below their level without prior knowledge. I am certain in my opinion that many, many had reviewed this shameful indignity to our country. Give us all a break and just admit the truth, in my opinion the deed was done with every intention to receive the publicity it has gotten. Never will I watch the many networks that NBC owns.
It was 1892.
"I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands: one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."
The original Pledge.
No God.
Modern politicians are constantly trying to evoke the need to stand by our original Constitution as its stated.
Mandating the need of separation between church and state.
Church stays @ home, not broadcast to the masses.
Tonya A.I totally disagree. By removing "under God" you are removing the truth and this nation was founded under our freedom to worship him. The reason you dont want to acknowledge God is cause you dont want to acknowledge the truth. I would much rather have Jesus and find out he wasnt real (which wont happen) then be without him and find out hes real and go to hell. your choice. i think the "under God" should stay and yes. im glad people think christians are trying to take over. maybe the country will do better with a little honesty. my 2 cents worth.
Thomas Jefferson wrote "...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
Meaning he didn't want a presiding entity (i.e. national broadcasting network) to overstep our rights for religious liberty. Not everyone agrees with religion, therefore NBC is neutral ground.Charlie K.Dear mister E-fat Smith
You are, I assume, a constitutionalists.
Therefore there is no need to ask as to why you have taken a humanist view.
Please do not judge me as though I feel as though the words "under God" are just a religious view of mine, but a patriotic view.
Adherence to the laws of this great land is more my purpose. The pledge is at this time, does indeed, contain the words you have found so offensive.
Because they maybe offensive to you, you have a right to privately not to say them. NBC who has publicly used it's format to lead others in the pledge of allegiance, may not have the same right.
With thorough know ledge of this, (and I do hope you understand)you must agree that to do other than the "in effect" pledge at this time is treasonous.
You are given the right to contact your Congressional Representatives to ask them to institute laws that reflect you point of view.
Perhaps by the time you have changed the pledge we will be one nation with only one viewpoint. Yours'.
Until then do not expect others to admonish this unpatriotic act of treason or go unerringly down your road.
Again, I must ask for forgiveness for any portion you have lost in your life, that while living in this wonderful country, if indeed the pledge has done so.
If you are so very adamant to live in a country that does not support the knowledge of, and bestow words of acknowledgement to a supreme being, feel free to move about the world as you see necessary.
There shouldn't have to be a "pledge" to begin with.
Mankind should have enough mental capacity to operate independently without having to recite some ritual, some holy chant.
Surely we have evolved as a species to acknowledge free will & thought rather than relying on patriotic (fascist) psychology.
Now that "under God" was removed, there drew up a high level of hostility.
Seems counter-productive to argue about an omission like this, if in fact, living "under God" is an absolute truth.
Is the sky blue? Yes
Are lemons sour? You betcha
Living "under God"? Well....Some say yes, some say no.(to be continued.....)
Interesting that you use a capitalist website "blogger" to ask for donations for you blog. That is an awful lot of capitalism going on under the guise of anti-capitalism.
ReplyDeleteDo you hold a job in this capitalist system? Do you purchase the fruits of the capitalist system? Televisions, computers, ipods/iphones/android cellphones to chat with your friends over capitalist designed and financed systems? Or, have you completely gone off the grid? If not. Save your blathering for the time you live what you preach.
I'm an atheist capitalist, and laugh at the fact you start with a comment of "those who appear to be aware of social awareness."
You must be unaware that the system you deride has produced more prosperity for more people than any other system in history, including communism, which has been tried several times, and has failed spectacularly each time.
Even the chinese couldn't pull themselves out of their hole until they decided to allow capitalism in to save their economy.
It is the only system that doesn't ignore the fact that people are not uniformly intelligent, talented and aggressive. Those people will rise to the top of every system, and they will make certain that they gain more than the average worker.
I've built businesses in Asia, Europe, the U.S., and conducted business in China and the former U.S.S.R.
Very few people outside those countries have a clue how dismal prospects were in those countries until capitalism was allowed to work its magic.
Is capitalism without its own problems? No. It is a system run by people who, like in any system, are subject to the corrupting influences of power and money.
Socially aware? You may be, but you are also economically naive.
By the way, my name is Richard McCargar, try not to hide behind a pseudonym when you conduct your courageous dialogs.
You can see that I don't hide.
www.DoctorOfDisbelief.com
Fantastic! Thanks for one of the more passionate responses toward my blog. Although I had to sit and wait my turn in order to make my rebuttal while sifting through the pessimistic vomit you continuously spewed onto my board without offering any intellectual encouragement, how typical.
ReplyDeleteGlad to see you’ve maintained businesses in multiple areas around the globe, that must provide a descent amount of self-confidence to prove you’re not exactly a half-wit roaming the earth. You spotted my donation section on my page; that above any other artistic and literary component illustrated on my blog, how observant. Have you visited any other Marxist/Communistic/Progressively Socialistic webpages lately? They all have similar charitable engines running, as the whole concept of spreading awareness depends on connecting/strengthening members of the cause.
Unfortunately, money talks in this chaotic society we live in, the only way a voice can be heard is through connections & clout. The only way a “radical” voice can be heard is through maintaining a grassroots campaign of tsunami-sized proportions; if our concept of money has to be exchanged for that to happen, so be it. You would be totally remiss if you ignored/disregarded that fact while maintaining operations in a capitalistically dominated arena. The saying of “When in Rome, do as the Romans do” has definite meaning when it comes to that fact.
Sad, I though you would have more to offer furthering the discussion towards the religious permeation within our society, given your $2.00 honorary PhD from Logidea University. Way to go, a crowning achievement among men! All jokes aside, I’ve never heard of doctorofdisbelief.com before, looks interesting, thanks for that. I’ll start looking into it even more, looks interesting.
You were remiss in not showing the courage to discuss this using your name.
ReplyDeleteYou made no rebuttal.
If this is the way you plan to teach the world, you have lost before you have begun.
Why don't you fund yourself? Insufficiently successful to do so?
Richard
My name is not for discussion.
ReplyDeleteMainly:
A. Silly men shouldn't post silly information for silly people to use silly search tools in order to dive into personal affairs (address, work, car, family members, the works).
B. Even the Pope and Malcolm X were clever enough not to disclose personal names and information.
C. We haven't established any kind of rapport, I don't even know you, I don't think I will ever want to, plus, you still haven't asked me nicely :c)
Ummmm, with the blog only 1-week old, it appears to be progressively building a collective of like-minded individuals; individuals who offer collaborative comments and intellectual support towards this cause.
Not pushing some cheap embroidered t-shirt with a logo, that's farmed out of some sweat-shop extorting migrant workers for pennies on the dollar: that's pure capitalism...
So....When are we going to address pertinent matters at hand with more of a fruitful/intelligent debate?
Nothing huh...just spite?
Oh ok, moving onward...